About your Search

20121006
20121014
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
on them by the government. >> he estimates the fact that as governor in eliminated the estate tax and took more than 100,000 low income virginians of the income tax rolls. i just thought i would correct him there. george and i have very different strategies. this is one of the most important programs that has ever been done by the government. more than 50% of american seniors have retired into poverty before it was passed. thank you we have -- thank god we have those days behind us. that would've been a huge catastrophe prior to the collapse in washington. what i would do is allow the payroll tax of words as a way of protecting the solvency of the program. on medicare, george allen supports the ryan budget that would turn medicare into a voucher program and push costs onto the seniors. i propose a senior savings costs, for example ending the prescription -- that we get. that would save us without jeopardize in the benefit of all. >> mr. allen, to ask both of you to take one minute to respond to tim kaine's assocation about medicare and to support the ryan budget? >> what i support is prese
made clear, there's nothing conservative about a government that prevents a woman from making her own health care decisions. governor romney talks about freedom. but freedom is the ability to determine the care you need when you need it. freedom is the ability to change jobs or start your own business without the fear of losing your health insurance. freedom is the knowledge that you'll no longer be charged more than men for the same health care. or denied affordable coverage just because you've beat cancer. and at a time when women make up nearly half the work force, and an increasing share of family bread winners, these are not just health issues or women's issues. these are economic issues that are vital and affect every family in america. they matter. when -- when a woman is the main bread winner for her family but takes home less pay for the same work, as a man does because she's a woman, that is not right. when my opponent's campaign was asked if he'd support legislation given -- giving women the tools to fight for an equal day's pay for an equal day's work, he said we'll get ba
affirm that it is ok for a public institution, whether it's government body handing out contracts or student or college admitting students, that it's ok for them to try to make sure that their student body looks like the state looks. they should if at all practical use factors on race and economic disadvantage, are you the first in your family to go to college? but if you see public institutions where the numbers of students dramatically different then the state population, i think it's an indication of challenge and problem that we have to try to solve. i strongly believe the diversity of our commonwealth is the strength, diversity of our nation is a strength and we ought to see diversity in our public bodies. >> mr. allen? >> i'm in some agreement with tim's expressions. i'm someone who's in favor of affirmative recruitment and i think everyone regardless of background ought to have an equal opportunity to compete and succeed. i would not want to deny people an opportunity based oni would e an opportunity based on race regardless of what their race is. while affirmative recruitm
? is there a point where the federal government seizes control of the project? dr. ruiz? >> thank you for bringing this up, because it really brings very pleasant memories of my father taking me there to fish and havin picnics with the family. now we're seeing dead fish and a stink that is unbearable. and this is somewhere where congresswoman has failed to deliver. she continues to talk a big game. she promised in her first election that she would fix the sea. 14 years later it has not been fixed. i don't know what stippings more, a broken promise or the sultan sea. in fact, this is a great opportunity right now for us to revive that sultan sea so that we can have it as a hot spot for tourism, so that other children can fish with their fairs, so we can develop geothermal energy and boost our economy. and the way we're going to go about doing it is public/private partnerships with local input and authority so that we can come together and stop this bickering and attack talk and all this other stuff that congresswoman bono mack is so adept at and skilled, but really come up with some problem-solving
to the cyber threat requires the right policies and organizations across the federal government. for the past year, the department of defense has been working closely with other agencies to understand where are the lines of responsibility when it comes to cyber defense? where do we draw those lines? how do those responsibilities get executed? as part of that effort, the department is now finalizing the most comprehensive change to our rules of engagement in cyberspace in seven years. the new rules will make clear that the department has a responsibility not only to be thin d.o.d.'s networks -- to networks, but to defend the nation and our natural -- national interests in cyberspace. these new rules makes the department more agile and provides us with the ability to confront major threats quickly. to execute these responsibilities, we must have strong organizational structures in place. three years ago, the department took a major step forward by establishing the united states cyber command. under the leadership of a four start officer who also served as the director of the national security a
to have another stimulus. how did the last one work out? and then they plan on hiring more government workers. there's nothing wrong with getting more government workers but that's not going to get the economy going. they have more investments. a friend of mine said they just pick losers. and then of course, they want to raise taxes. i don't think anyone believes racing taxes creates more jobs. they just don't understand what it takes to get this economy going and we have a plan. five key elements. and paul spoke about them last night. let me mention, number one, we're taking full advantage of our oil, our nuclear, out renewables. we're going to take advantage of our energy. that will protect and grow energy jobs and also manufacturing. there are a lot of manufacturing jobs including in the glass industry. they use a lot of energy. and when energy's less expensive jobs come back here. we keep under, president obama we've lost 600,000 manufacturing jobs. we want to bring jobs back home to america. that's number one. we will open up more markets for our goods. but if people cheat like c
, and run one of the most responsive city governments in the nation. even when that means rescuing citizens from burning buildings in the morning and shoveling snow from their driveways in the afternoon, i can only guess that come nightfall, perhaps a cape gets thrown into the mix there. he has fought for marriage a quality, and he has never shied away from calling out politicians like governor chris kristi, who vetoed our equality. as the co-chair of the democratic party platform committee this year, our guest led the way on securing a pro- marriage a quality plank in this party's platform. ladies and gentlemen, it is my privilege to introduce a mayor who fights for you, mayor cory booker. >> ♪ i've got the moves like jagger. i've got the moves like jagger. i don't need to try to control you. look into my eyes and i'll own you with the moves like jagger. ♪ >> good evening, everybody. [applause] i feel the excitement. i am telling you right now, this room right here has within it the spirit of our common ancestor. i am not talking about ancestry, blood ties. it can access the spirit of
of that nature. now, it's different whether there's a government grant, where the market power derives from political authority. and that's true of some of the essential facility cases. stadiums, stadium approvals and the like. but if the facility has become essential through market processes, which is surely the case of google, it represents success. and that firm is entitled to all the reward it can gain. now, greg and bob do a terrific job of showing why the google experience does not fit the scraps of law on essential facilities. but i think they should go further. they should deny that there's any merit to the concept at all. now, i think this is true of other parts of the paper. as i alluded to earlier, much of the paper is empirical. and i learned a lot from it really. there's a lot of detail in it. and i learned a lot. but the -- those responses and that empirical -- making the point that criticism by competitors of google's practices are just wrong on the facts. but i think that that's not enough. especially in representing the chicago school. the failings of the arguments by googl
? and then it will hire more government workers. there is nothing wrong with government workers, but that will knock the economy going. and then they have plans to make investments, they say. a friend of mine said that they don't want to pick winners and losers, they just pick losers. and then they want to raise taxes. i don't think anyone believes raising taxes creates more jobs. they just don't understand what it takes to get this economy going, and we have a plan. five key elements. paul spoke about them last night. number 1, we are taking full advantage of our oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear, renewables. we will take advantage of our energy, and that will protect and grow energy, jobs, and also manufacturing. there are a lot of manufacturing jobs, including in the glass industry, that use a lot of energy. when energy is less expensive, jobs come back. under president obama, we have lost 600,000 manufacturing jobs. we want to bring jobs back to america. that is number one. number 2, we're going to make trade work for us. we will open up more markets for our goods. but if people cheat like china h
after submit to the government. it's a highly transparent operation. it is in this house atmosphere under a scorching aware of the spotlight that leadership is on display at for everyone to see. it's like a leadership reality show. imagine coming to work to a place where everything boss says, every decision that you make, every action your organization takes is available for everyone to see, if you think about it this way, the campaign is pretty amazing. and so, i like to use the 2008 campaign as a canvas. i like to use it as a way to talk about some of the things -- it's like, using it as a laboratory, to understand why winners win and why losers lose. if you look at 2008, you have everything from how did you take this little known brand of barack obama and turn it into a campbell soup of politics, which is what you had with the clintons, they had a very long history and years of service. how do you manage through a crisis? what happens when that prices outside starts to shake the confidence inside? how do you get control of a narrative that is escaping? all those things are availa
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)